Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40308429›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Comparison of Hadlock and INTERGROWTH-21st Growth Charts for Estimating Fetal Weight in the Third Trimester via Ultrasound.

Rashi Saini, Sumitra Bachani, Jyotsna Suri, Monika Gupta, Aprajita Gupta, Poornima Sharma, Pradeep Debata

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Rashi SainiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, IND.
Sumitra BachaniDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, IND.
Jyotsna SuriDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, IND.
Monika GuptaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, IND.
Aprajita GuptaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, IND.
Poornima SharmaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, IND.
Pradeep DebataDepartment of Pediatrics, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction Early identification of growth abnormalities is crucial in preventing fetal death and ensuring optimal care for fetuses requiring close monitoring and timely delivery. Sonographic estimation of fetal weight must be quantified in centiles according to gestational age reference charts to assess fetal growth velocity and size. These measurements can categorize the fetus as small, appropriate, or large for gestational age. Recent discussions have highlighted the increasing need for evidence-based guidelines for selecting the most suitable growth charts. Objectives The objective of this study is to compare the diagnostic accuracy of Hadlock versus INTERGROWTH 21st (IG 21) growth charts for estimating fetal weight. Methods This is a prospective cohort study conducted on 277 pregnant women with singleton fetuses at 32-34 weeks of gestation in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at a tertiary care referral center in North India. The participants underwent two ultrasound scans, first at the 32- to 34-week period of gestation (POG) and then a second ultrasound scan at the 38- to 40-week POG or one week before delivery. Labor and delivery outcomes were noted, and neonatal weight was recorded. The mother and neonate were observed for any perinatal complications till discharge from the hospital. Results The mean POG at the first scan was 33.00 weeks. At the first scan, the mean of estimated fetal weight (EFW) by Hadlock was 1966.96 g. The mean of EFW by IG 21 was 1861.50 g. There was a strong positive correlation between EFW by IG 21 and EFW by Hadlock in the first scan, and this correlation was statistically significant (r = 0.78, p ≤ 0.001). The mean POG at the second scan was 38.63 weeks. The mean of EFW in the second scan by Hadlock was 2905.24 g. The mean of EFW in the second scan by IG 21 was 2829.32 g. There was a strong positive correlation between EFW by IG 21 and EFW by Hadlock in the second scan, and it was statistically significant (r = 0.71, p ≤ 0.001). For every 1 g increment in EFW on the second scan by Hadlock, the birth weight (g) increases by 0.86 g. For every 1 g increment in EFW on the second scan by IG 21, the birth weight increases by 0.82 g. Conclusion Both Hadlock and IG 21 charts have a fair agreement with EFW in early and late trimester scans. Hence, either one of the two can be used for fetal biometry.

Indexed as

estimated fetal weightfetal biometryfetal growth chartsfetal growth restrictionfetal growth velocityhadlock's formulaintergrowth chart

Identifiers

PMID40308429
PMCPMC12042984

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.